Ask Lemmy
A Fediverse community for open-ended, thought provoking questions
Rules: (interactive)
1) Be nice and; have fun
Doxxing, trolling, sealioning, racism, and toxicity are not welcomed in AskLemmy. Remember what your mother said: if you can't say something nice, don't say anything at all. In addition, the site-wide Lemmy.world terms of service also apply here. Please familiarize yourself with them
2) All posts must end with a '?'
This is sort of like Jeopardy. Please phrase all post titles in the form of a proper question ending with ?
3) No spam
Please do not flood the community with nonsense. Actual suspected spammers will be banned on site. No astroturfing.
4) NSFW is okay, within reason
Just remember to tag posts with either a content warning or a [NSFW] tag. Overtly sexual posts are not allowed, please direct them to either !asklemmyafterdark@lemmy.world or !asklemmynsfw@lemmynsfw.com.
NSFW comments should be restricted to posts tagged [NSFW].
5) This is not a support community.
It is not a place for 'how do I?', type questions.
If you have any questions regarding the site itself or would like to report a community, please direct them to Lemmy.world Support or email info@lemmy.world. For other questions check our partnered communities list, or use the search function.
6) No US Politics.
Please don't post about current US Politics. If you need to do this, try !politicaldiscussion@lemmy.world or !askusa@discuss.online
Reminder: The terms of service apply here too.
Partnered Communities:
Logo design credit goes to: tubbadu
view the rest of the comments
Then why are there more straight religious leaders convicted of child molestation than gay people? It sounds like your research lacked any actual data.
Yes, I’m sure it’s the more complicated explanation that requires more assumptions rather than the simpler explanation that you’re just wrong.
Ockham's Razor doesn't work here, nor does it work most of the time. The reason why a mod removed some of my comments on this post, despite my opinion being what it is, was because I didn't use Ockham's Razor (on top of that, the mod basically admitting that I told the truth).
Statistics don’t agree with you. Data doesn’t agree with you. Evidence doesn’t agree with you.
But you know you’re right, right? Your pastor agrees with you, right? And the conservatives who hate the gays agree with you. Everyone who uses feelings instead of evidence agrees with you. Surely that means you’re right.
This kind of anti-gay apologia was legitimately discredited decades ago by all accepted standards, and your research is shit.
Anita Bryant, shut up.
Discredited by accepted standards means it was accepted using a flawed system that was overrun by academia and the media, of which is highly American-style liberal. American Conservatives lost it in the 1970's I think (That's from an episode of The Survival Podcast I listened to, so you can take a look at if I got it wrong).
That's thanks to Rules For Radicals by Saul Alinsky, of which American Democrats used against Republicans for years, and now they're starting to do the exact same thing, though astroturfing the flip out of it.
I can't tell if you're doing a bit where you pretend to be a bigot from the 1950's, but gay people aren't pedophiles "on average."
The overwhelming majority of pedophiles are exactly who you would think they are, those who are outspokenly against lgbtq. The opposition is an act. Normal people (non-pedophiles) have no motive to come out against homosexuality; there's no reason to do so. Unless you have something worse to hide.